Venerable Pius XII 150 Years After His Birth

This March 2nd marks the 150th anniversary of the birth of Venerable Pius XII. Pope Pius XII was born Eugenio Pacelli in 1876. When he grew up he would go on to become Cardinal Pacelli and hold the position of Cardinal Secretary of State of the Vatican until he was elected Pope in 1939. On his 63rd birthday, he took on the name Pius XII. Pius XII was the first Cardinal Secretary of State to be elected Pope since 1667. He went on to reign for nineteen years, serving as the pope throughout the entirety of the Second World War. His actions during that time period would go on to define his papacy in the eyes of many. However, he also fell victim to many vicious lies about and surrounding his wartime conduct.

One of the more controversial aspects of Pope Pius XII’s papacy was how he responded to Nazism and the holocaust. Pius XII’s supposed silence and inaction have unfairly led to the moniker of “Hitler’s Pope.” However, as history will show, that name is false and far from the truth. Both before and during his tenure as pope, Pius XII undertook numerous efforts to fight Nazism. During his time as Cardinal Secretary of State, Pius XII played a key role in drafting the anti-Nazi Papal encyclical Mit brennender Sorge. This encyclical was then smuggled into Nazi Germany and read from every Catholic pulpit on Palm Sunday in 1937. As pope, his actions saved the lives of hundreds of thousands of Jews during the Holocaust [1]. Under Pope Pius XII’s orders, churches and monasteries sheltered thousands of Jewish people; he even provided refuge in the Vatican and in his summer residence. The pope also undertook great diplomatic efforts within the Vatican, issuing thousands of false baptismal certificates and travel documents to help Jews escape Nazi occupied territory. Pius XII placed significant diplomatic pressure on Hungary, preventing the deportation of around 24,000 Jews from the country [2]. These efforts by Pope Pius XII did not go unnoticed by the Jewish community. Notably, the Chief Rabbi of Rome during the Second World War, who, in part due to the pope’s efforts, converted to Catholicism in 1945 and took the baptismal name Eugenio in honor of Pius XII. 

After the Second World War, Pius XII was met with new challenges as he led the Church in a fractured, war-torn Europe facing the emerging Cold War. Pius XII took an uncompromising stance against communism, excommunicating professed communists in 1949 in the document titled the Decree Against Communism. He also strongly condemned the persecution of the Eastern Church under the Soviet Union. Pope Venerable Pius XII’s papacy ended with his death on October 9, 1958. Pius XII’s cause for canonization was opened on November 18, 1965, by Saint Paul VI. He was declared a Servant of God in 1990 by Saint John Paul II and was declared Venerable by Pope Benedict XVI on December 19, 2009.

End Notes:

[1] “The Vatican & the Holocaust: 860,000 Lives Saved - the Truth about Pius XII & the Jews.” 2026. Jewish Virtual Library. 2026. https://jewishvirtuallibrary.org/860-000-lives-saved-the-truth-about-pius-xii-and-the-jews.

[2] Budapest, in. 2019. “Rescue in the Holocaust.” Rescue in the Holocaust. 2019. https://www.holocaustrescue.org/chronology-of-rescue-by-vatican-diplomats-in-budapest.

Father Reiser, An Accidental Missionary

On Thursday, February 5th 2026, one of the Holy Cross’ most committed stewards left Mt. St. James and entered into retirement at the Jesuit Campion Center in Weston, Massachusetts. I was fortunate enough to conduct an informal interview with Father Reiser on December 9th, prior to his departure. Throughout our discussion, there were many experiences which I found profoundly insightful. In this piece, I would like to most thoroughly cover the aspects of Fr. Reiser’s life which are most personal to him: his missionary work.

Fr. Reiser was born in Connecticut, the oldest of a family of ten. Early in his youth, the soon-to-be-priest felt a great calling, a “mystery” which continued to prompt an “intense feeling that… this is the calling.” God may have called him through his family’s experience in WWII: “[m]y father was in the Second World War, in the forces on Normandy. When he was in the war, he went to Mass regularly. There was something about my parents’ faith … I don't know what it was that caught me. But it really caught my attention.”

After completing eighth grade, Fr. Reiser would follow this sense into the St. Thomas Minor Seminary in Bloomfield, Connecticut. As part of a six year program, students at St. Thomas were nurtured through a thorough cultivation of classical studies. On why he ultimately chose the Jesuits, of all the Catholic orders, Fr. Reiser joked, “I was, as in the famous line from the movie Casablanca,  misinformed.’ 
I thought they were all missionaries. Yeah, I said, ‘All Jesuits were missionaries.’ 
And what I wanted to do was become a missionary, to go on missions… The Jesuits were one of the largest missionary orders in the church. 
And that's all I knew. I did not know any Jesuits.”

One of the stories which drove his intense passion to go on missions came from the book These Two Hands. The story follows Father E.J. Edwards as “a missionary in the Philippines. And he was nervous about having contact with the native people because you never could tell what would happen. And he was afraid of contracting leprosy. [But] there was a fire in a village, and he realized that there was a woman in there who was a leper, who was unable to get out of her house. 
And so what he did, he went in and rescued her. The result was that he took her out, carrying her out, but his hands were scarred for the rest of his life. And I thought, ‘Well, could I do something like that?’ That was the question. And so I said, ‘Well, you don't know unless you try it.’ You know, who knows? 
But it stayed in the back of my head.”

His desire to teach the world eventually came to fruition. Over the course of his apostolic career, Fr. Reiser visited many countries: India, Nepal, Burma, Thailand, Sri Lanka, and Indonesia, to Paraguay, Peru, and especially Bolivia, which he visited many times. He wanted to understand how people in the Andean world heard the gospel. What difference does the Andean context make? What would an Andean theology look like? 

“Andean theology,” Fr. Reiser explains, “would be theology as done taking culture seriously. How do you understand and express the gospel, along with, say, the culture of the Aymara people… For example, you've got a long, long tradition that goes back to the Inca. So there's some things that you won't understand unless you understand where this is coming from, you know? What do you do? Do you reject it out right and say, this is problematic for our faith? Or do you see how people from within a culture have appropriated the gospel in a unique way. So, for example, in the Andean world, the Pachamama is very important. What is it? Well, Pachamama is present everywhere. Pachamama is like a divine presence. It has to do with rocks and mountains and water and wheat, and so on. The Pachamama is the earth, but the earth as being generous. At any rate, if you're brought up in that culture, then the way you appropriate faith is different.”

He continues with several anecdotes from his missions: “We were driving, one day, up La Cumbre in a jeep. 
We're at about 13,000, almost 14,000 feet. It's pretty high up. And there was a Jesuit driving, and we were going by that mountain, way at the top, and he made some kind of a gesture towards the mountain, and then we continued driving. 
I said, ‘Ricardo, what was that? What did you just do?’ And he laughed and said, ‘Oh, my mother taught us that when we were kids. You don't go past the mountains without asking permission.’ Now, it makes no sense if you don't grow up there. If you grow up there, it's all around you. You're living in the Andes. It's a different world. So, it's a very small example, but a place where you get to see the influence of a culture, a longstanding culture, and the way in which people live off of their faith today. 


“And there's much of that. In the Andean world, community is extremely important. This is true at other places as well, but in the Andean world, just to make a decision, you do it together. And if you're not on board, we wait. We just wait until there is consensus, and then we go forward. In the Andean world, the idea that somebody could actually own a piece of the earth is odd. The Earth includes the bones of the Pachamama, and we happen to be passing through. 
You can't own property. So the whole Western idea of real estate… putting a title or a claim on a land is just something that’s foreign to them.

“One of the missionaries told a story, ‘The women would come in with their produce, and they'd be sitting outside selling things all day long, like oranges… And this one visitor came by and looked at them; she wanted to buy all the oranges. And the campesino—she was a campesino—she said, no, she wouldn't sell them all. And we said, ‘Why not?’ And she said, ‘Because, what will I do for the rest of the day? I have nothing else to do today.’” It's so different from our way of thinking.

Fr. Reiser continues to elaborate on how these experiences shaped his vocation. “As the years are going by, the different parts of the world that I've been able to see, have found [their] way into the things that I say in class. It's there. The same is true with being in ministry, as a Priest. That what's going on around you has an effect on who you are as a person. So we don't just preach. You preach what you believe. There's a special… grace that comes from the experience of preaching. When the effort is really to open up the scriptural words, to reflect on that with a group of people, a parish or a congregation. The people hearing not just you and not just the word, they're also hearing you as a person. And I would say that the people draw things out of us. Students do, too. Students draw things from teachers. If we reflect on what's happening, after a number of years, I think that we'd have to say that lots of what we have learned has been drawn out of us from our students.”

There is much more wisdom that came out of my discussion with Fr. Reiser; especially in regard to Holy Cross throughout the last fifty years, the role of education in public life, and of his domestic career and courses he has taught. However, in an effort to more fully disclose his experiences, I will render them in a later piece. This piece centered on his missionary work because it was evident that he cared deeply for these communities, and that was what set off his priestly vocation.

Pray for Father Reiser, his fellow Jesuits, and his family as he enters a new chapter in his life. He hopes to take advantage of his retirement to write, and to continue to engage with the communities of St. Bernard’s and St. Luke’s parishes in the Diocese of Worcester. None of us is ever a missionary by accident!

A Biblical Defense of the Eucharist

The American Catholic novelist Flannery O’Connor famously said on the Eucharist, “If it’s just a symbol, to hell with it.” O’Connor’s language may be stark, but necessarily frank to demonstrate the gravity of the Host. From the inception of the Church, the affirmation of the Real Presence was rooted in Christ's own words. In the Bread of Life discourse, Jesus says, “I am the living bread that came down from heaven; whoever eats this bread will live forever; and the bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of the world" (John 6:51). This is very clearly Jesus talking about how His flesh is the bread from Heaven, reaffirming the Real Presence of Him in the Eucharist. But not everyone immediately believed, questioning Jesus’s meaning in saying that they had to eat Him; “the Jews quarreled among themselves, saying, ‘How can this man give us [his] flesh to eat?’” (John 6:52). But Jesus, after the doubt of the people about eating His flesh, doubled down. “Jesus said to them, ‘Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you’” (John 6:53). Jesus also emphasizes the importance of the Eucharist, saying, “Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day” (John 6:54). Jesus in the original Greek also changes the word He uses for eat after He stresses his point. When He originally commands them to eat, He used the word phago, which simply means “to eat” in Greek, but the second time He shifts to trōgon, which means “to literally gnaw or chew,” emphasizing the importance of physically eating Him in the Eucharist.

Even after all of that, there were still those who did not believe in what Jesus said and did not believe when He said that you had to eat His flesh to have eternal life. Those people said “This saying is hard; who can accept it?” (John 6:60). Jesus responds by saying, “Does this shock you? What if you were to see the Son of Man ascending to where he was before? It is the spirit that gives life, the flesh is of no avail; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life.” (John 6:61-63). Notice Jesus does not say “my flesh” is of no avail He says “the flesh” is of no avail [1]. Jesus also says He “Knew from the beginning the ones who would not believe and the one who would betray him” (John 6:64), saying also “For this reason I have told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by my Father” (John 6:65). Subsequently, many disciples left Jesus because of this teaching. “As a result of this, many [of] his disciples returned to their former way of life and no longer accompanied him” (John 6:66). Many disciples left Jesus because of His teaching on the Eucharist as shown above, but Jesus did not change His teaching. He doubles down, stressing  the literal truth of His teaching on eating His flesh; even saying you have no life in you unless you eat His flesh and drink His blood in John 6:53. The Gospel of St. John demonstrates and emphasizes the literal nature and significance of eating and drinking the real flesh and blood of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. The Eucharist is truly “the source and summit of Christian life” (CCC 1324).

End Notes:

[1] Broussard, Karlo. 2019. “Why Communion If Flesh Is of No Avail?” Catholic Answers. https://www.catholic.com/qa/why-communion-if-flesh-is-of-no-avail.

Carthusian Life and Liturgy

The Carthusian Order is an enclosed religious order in the Catholic Church. In June of 1084, S. Bruno was called by the Bishop of Grenoble to establish a desert hermitage. Bruno felt that the seclusion of the Chartreuse valley in southeastern France was suitable for monastic life. Soon after, Bruno established a second hermitage in Calabria, Italy. He did not leave behind a written rule. Rather, the Carthusian Order has passed down his unique encapsulation of both eremitical and communal (cenobitic) monasticism [1]. This article will introduce the life of Carthusian monks as well as analyze their very unique liturgical theology. The aim is for an application of their charism and liturgical posture into a devotion for the laity.

Carthusian monasteries, called Charterhouses (named after Bruno’s first establishment in La Grande Chartreuse), begin their “day” at eleven in the evening. This is when the office of Matins, followed by Lauds, is prayed. The Angelus follows. Between two and three in the morning, the monks are permitted to return to their cells for rest, before rising again at six. Following the second rising, the office of Prime and another Angelus is prayed, preparation for Mass follows. At eight, there is a Conventual Mass, or Mass in Community.  Interestingly, the offices of Terce, Sext, and None, are prayed by each monk individually. The Carthusian prays three types of offices: the standard Office of the Carthusian Rite, the Office of the Dead, and the Office of the Blessed Virgin Mary [2].

The work for a monk depends upon the modality of his vocation. Monastic vocations to the Carthusian order are divided into two main categories in order to support the entirety of the Charterhouse. The cloister monks are ordained and can never leave their cells without permission, unless to attend the appointed times of the recitation of the office and Mass. While in their cell, cloister monks study and do work that is limited to either preparation for ordination, continuing education, or maintaining food and the landscape of their cell. The cell is not a singular room that might be found in Cistercian or Benedictine monasteries, but a small house with a workshop and garden [3]. St. Benedict himself addresses the need for manual labor and study in Chapter XLVIII of his Rule: “Idleness is inimical to the soul; and therefore the brethren ought to be occupied, at fixed seasons, with manual work and again at fixed seasons with spiritual reading: and so we think the hours for each should be arranged on this plan.” The lay brother monks mirror the cloister monks in that their life is marked by prayer and work. However, this work is done more to contribute to the collective physical existence of the Charterhouse itself. Examples of this work include cooking and facility maintenance. Lay brothers also live alone in cells, but with less utilities as they are not confined.

The Statues of the Carthusian Order describe the liturgy as “manifest[ing] in a special way the nature of the Church in which the human is directed and subjected to the divine, the visible to the invisible, action to contemplation” [4]. The Carthusian Rite can be originally found in the twelfth century. While Pope Pius V made adherence to the rubrics and propers of the Roman Missal required, the ancient Carthusian Rite was permitted due to its antecedence [5]. The rite itself derives from the bringing of the faith to Lyons by Ss. Pothinus and Irenaeus. Gregorian chant, interior devotion, and the physical manifestation of the Communion Rite form the basis of their communal participation.

There are two bodily actions of the celebrant that part the Carthusian Rite. The first is the fully extended arms (compared to the lesser extension of arms in the Roman Rite) of the priest similar to that of the extended arms of Christ. While this gesture, the orans position, has been in the Church since the first century, the Carthusian Rite’s emphasis and feature of the posture is itself a representation of their own sacrificial charism [6]. These monks make a unique sacrifice of isolation, labor, and prayer both to the Church and to the Christian faithful in their daily intercession for them. The celebrant in his role as the consecrator of the Holy Eucharist extends this charism into the Eucharistic sacrifice.

The second distinguishing gesture is prostration. The celebrant and community prostrate during the description of the annunciation, during the creed, after the elevation, and at the priest’s communion. Emphasized here is an attitude of unworthiness and humility. The sacred mysteries presented at the Mass demand a direction of subjection towards God. This is an act of justice, a fundamental Thomistic principle, as addressed in Question 21 of the First Part of the Summa Theologica.

The Carthusians bear an impressive and self-giving witness in the Church’s monastic life. But how can the laity take after them in their own spiritual lives? It begins with the little things. Perhaps instead of going straight to your phone as a source of entertainment when sloth sets in, a rosary can be prayed, a spiritual book read, or mental prayer in the presence of idleness and silence observed. To follow the Divine Office, smaller and more pointed offices for specific devotions can be prayed. The Little Office of the Blessed Virgin Mary is very popular, but there are many other little offices. The website LOBVM.com recently compiled a digital publication titled A Big Book of Little Offices, included in this volume are offices as diverse as the Little Office of S. Thomas Aquinas to the Little Office of the Holy Cross. The day can be sanctified by dividing one’s school work or manual labor with prayer and spiritual reading. Creating a personal horarium or schedule with specific times dedicated to work, study, and prayer can aid in this endeavor. We can follow the advice of St. Catherine of Siena, who wrote in an advice to her confessor, “Build a cell inside your mind, from which you can never flee.”

End Notes:

[1] (Alban Butler, Lives of the Saints, 1995, 338.)

[2] (“The Day – the Carthusian Monks,” n.d. https://chartreux.org/moines/en/a-carthusian-day/.)

[3] (The Statutes of the Carthusian Order, Book II)

[4] (The Statutes of the Carthusian Order, Book VI)

[5] (Pope Pius V, Quo Primum (1570))

[6] (Tertullian, De Oratione, 14)

Niceno-Constantinopolitan Triune Ecclesial Markers of the Church

During the liturgy, the Christian faithful recite the Nicene Creed. A central part of this creed is the affirmation of the Four Marks of the Church, proclaimed when the faithful say they believe “in one holy catholic and apostolic Church”, which was added at the First Council of Constantinople. These markers hold the depth of what constitutes the primary authority of the faith, revealed in the councils and being in Communion with the true body of tradition that was revealed by God through Christ and received by the Apostles. The Triune markers of the Church are what identify Her as the one, sole, and true Body of Christ. They reveal where the Triune God is able to be truly present to the fullest extent in the revealed Word.

Unity is a both visible and invisible sign of the catholicity of the Church. The essence of the concept can be described by Paul in 1 Corinthians 10:17, where he writes “[b]ecause there is one bread, we who are many are one body...”. Saint and Church Father Cyprian of Carthage uses a fitting analogy in his work On the Unity of the Church, writing, “The Church is one, which is spread abroad far and wide into a multitude by an increase of fruitfulness... just as the sun has many rays but one light.” Many times in the modern ecclesial landscape schismatic behavior is witnessed over changes with regards to the Liturgy. Both Paul and St. Cyprian show that this is a fruitless cause for concern, as the Catechism of the Catholic Church describes that “The diverse liturgical traditions or rites, legitimately recognized, manifest the catholicity of the Church, because they signify and communicate the same mystery of Christ.” (CCC 1208). The Novus Ordo liturgy is no less than the Latin Mass of the 1962 missal, nor is it less than the Eastern rites, as they can all ascribe to sound past teachings of the Church in all aspects of worship. Paul describes that there is “one bread” that serves as the Eucharistic unity of the Church as a primary meaning of his epistle. A secondary meaning exists, however, as Eucharistic communion has doctrinal implications. For there to be sacramental unity, there must exist a shared faith. Separating the Eucharist from doctrinal unity would mean to separate Christ’s teaching of one Faith and one true Church. “The celebration of the Eucharist, however, cannot be the starting point for communion; it presupposes that communion already exists...” (cf. Ecclesia de Eucharistia (Pope St. John Paul II, 2003), §35).

The Gospel of Matthew calls for the Christian to “[b]e you therefore perfect, as also your heavenly Father is perfect” (Matthew 5:48). Even in the Canon of the Old Testament, the Lord says to Abraham, "[w]alk before me, and be blameless" (Genesis 17:1). Sanctity is a defining process that brings a sinner closer to unity and oneness with God through Theosis. The Universal Call to Holiness is what is given to the soul upon its Baptism. This call is present for all the Baptized using the Triune formula, and is dependent on the continuing process of Salvation for a soul to complete in its entirety. It is important to note here that the condescending God lowers Himself to that of the level of mere mortal human sinners. Thus, the Salvation in this context is through the faithful who have been blessed by the presence of the Gospel in their lives. The Catechism teaches that “[t]hose who, through no fault of their own, do not know the gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience—those too may achieve eternal salvation” (CCC 847). Continuing, if God became man to free us from the bonds of sin, then thus we are made to become like God through holiness in our lives through faith and works. Salvation is not a single moment or revelation, although the process to salvation can begin with a moment of defining Grace, but it is the continuity vocation that the Universal Call to Holiness entails. The primary method of achieving said Call is through the Church. This is both through Her Sacraments but also in the various devotionals to the Triune God and veneration of the Saints who have become holy themselves that exist in the faithful. Emphasizing the Baptism, Church Father St. Clement of Alexandria wrote in Book Seven of the Stromata “The baptized person is illuminated, he is adopted as a son, he becomes holy and righteous.”

The Apostolic marker of the Church is most visible in the Sacrament of Holy Orders. Scripturally, it is centered in the Gospel (specifically, the Great Commission). In Matthew 28:19-20, Christ orders his disciples to “[t]herefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you.” St. Irenaeus writes in Book 3 of Against Heresies, “We are in a position to enumerate those who were appointed bishops in the churches by the apostles... and to show the succession of these men to our own time.” The ecclesial concept of Holy Orders itself is in and through Christ and his earthly ministry. It is the fulfillment of both of the aspects of the Great Commission. The first aspect is the order of the Christian faithful to make disciples themselves, guiding others to the Truth of Christ in His Church along with the cleansing and Christening of the soul in Baptism. The second aspect is what happens as a result of the disciple being created, focusing on the Universal Call to Holiness discussed previously. Religious life, particularly mendicant orders such as the Franciscan family, Dominicans, and Jesuits, whose unique charism each seek to build disciples and form them the ways of Christ. For the Franciscans, this is focused primarily on the materially poor. For the Dominicans, the spiritually poor. For the Jesuits, it is a combination of both materially and spiritually poor through missionary work and education in the Faith. Educational apostolates serve both aspects of the Great Commission, making disciples by calling students to Baptism or the deepening of their current faith. Those whose souls have been permanently marked by Christ in the Sacrament of Ordination are called by Him to follow and emulate Christ through a variety of means, which can be simplified to both growing and guarding the flock of Christ. While examples of Religious Priesthood show specific charisms of the following of Christ in the way of a particular Saint or Blessed, the Diocesan Priesthood in itself maintains what is perfectly captured in the life of Saint John Vianney, a diocesan priest in many parishes in Ars, France. Pope John XXIII declared him the patron of the holiness of parish clergy. His life was marked by a particular attention to bringing about radical spiritual transformation through the visible signs of the Grace of Jesus Christ in the form of the Sacraments, particularly the Most Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist. The sacramental role of those in Holy Orders in the Apostolic marker of the Church allows for the deification of the faithful through the sacrifices that they offer in persona Christi.

Clothes Make the Man

“For the apparel oft proclaims the man” ~ Shakespeare

“Domine non sum dignus” ~ Matthew 8:8

If you were to ask any of the students who attended Saint Anthony’s High School to say what made their school special amongst both private and public schools, there is no doubt that the active presence of the Franciscan Brothers of Brooklyn would be duly noted. Humble and hard-working men, they have shaped the Faith of the hundreds of thousands of students that have crossed their path. They have fostered in each the image of an unwavering yet tender-hearted Church. There is no wonder that their alumni often find themselves in professions dedicated to upholding Church teachings. 

This would not have been possible had it not been for their religious apparel, the Habit. The Habit is an essential element of what it means to be a Franciscan. It ranges from gray to brown to black depending on the particular community, but it is always fastened by a white waist cord with the Franciscan Crown attached. By wearing it, the Brothers unite their own individuality into a common charism. They place themselves in a paradox: though maintaining full membership in this world, they are engaging in it as citizens of Heaven.

The Habit is not a unique expression of this function. It is a part of what is collectively known as the religious dress. In the Christian world, primarily in the Western and Eastern churches, this refers to the daily clothing we see members of Religious Orders—both male and female—wear. Take the Jesuits on campus for example. Aside from the “S.J.” suffix attached to their names, they are easily discernible by their black attire and Roman collar. For male religious, these “street clothes” vary in appearance based on clerical state, ordination rank, and additional responsibilities; but in general, they are either a black clerical suit or cassock with a white Roman collar [1]. For female religious, the clothes vary based on the community and its particular charism. 

Many religious communities, like the Franciscans, maintain a traditional dress which is worn when with the community, when at work, or when amongst other religious groups. The Jesuits, as a tenet of their religious community and its distinct mission, do not have a special habit; rather, they generally adopt the clerical dress typical of the local diocesan priests [2]. 

The more solemn clothing, the vestments or in layman’s terms the “big guns”, are worn by the priest alone during the performance of the Sacraments. As Catholics, we are most familiar with these because of their primary and extensive usage at the Mass [3]. 

The Mass: it is the axis and pinnacle of a Christian’s life. It is Christ’s gift to the world that serves as both the perpetual renewal and memorial of His monumental sacrifice. This definitive expression of His boundless love lies at the heart of the Eucharist: when the bread and wine are transubstantiated beyond human comprehension into His Body and Blood [4]. It is in part by utilizing the finest adornments at Her disposal that the Church does Her best to both affirm and invite us to partake in this mystical, life-giving event—which yields the gifts of Joy and Hope. 

The Priest’s appearance and attire must, therefore, equally evoke the nature of Christ. His outermost garment, the chasuble, shows the all-encompassing, protective, and definitive Love of Christ; while His innermost, the white amice, serves as the Helmet of Christ’s redemptive blood that cleanses sin and sustains all with Grace even at their lowest points [5]. It was thus the view of Pope Saint John Paul II, one in which I find myself realizing, that such grand things as tiaras, laced trimmings, and jewels that were once members of the vestments, were only ever meant to accentuate, not eclipse this great Truth [6].

Even when away from the altar, the priest remains in Persona Christi, in the person of Christ. Many of us either do not know or properly realize that to be a priest or to be a member of a religious community is not an occupation. It is the occupant's sole identity, an indelible mark made by ordination or final vows that requires voluntary, utter self-surrender to the Will of God [7]. Our Eastern brethren recognize this better than we do, for whenever they greet an Orthodox cleric they are sure to kiss his hand while silently asking for a blessing. This is not a mark of clericalism nor a gesture based solely on cultural modes of respect: rather, it is the most efficacious and humbling reminder to the cleric of the august, yet heavy responsibilities entrusted to him.

Mankind has been made in the image and likeness of God [8]. This is an irrevocable Truth. We are all called, therefore, to certain responsibilities that are equal not in degree, but in bringing greater glory to Him. The clergy and religious communities do this in a highly visible and personal fashion when wearing their dress. They are publicly declaring witness to Christ’s infinite love and mercy which has, at extreme times, culminated in their martyrdom. They truly are the cornerstones of the Church and instruments of Christ. Therefore, their dress serves as an emblem to their mission. It invites all, particularly the struggling and the young, and asks each to seek meaning beyond this world. To accept the offer to be a part of something that demands the whole person. Something that is truly and utterly Divine. That ultimate calling: to be children of the Church.

Endnotes:

[1] Thurston, Herbert. “Clerical Costume.” CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Clerical

Costume, 1908. https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04419b.htm.

[2] Saint Ignatius of Loyola, The Constitutions of the Society of Jesus and Their

Complementary Norms: A Complete English Translation of the Official Latin Texts,

(Institute of Jesuit Sources, 1996). 

[3] Braun, Joseph. “Vestments.” CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Vestments, 1912.

https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15388a.htm.

[4] Jungmann, Josef Andreas, and Francis A Brunner. “The Mass Ceremonies in

Detail: Putting on the Liturgical Vestments.” Essay. In The Mass of the Roman Rite:

Its Origins & Development (Missarum Sollemnia), 276–89. Vienna, Austria: Herder

Verlag, 1950. 

[5] Jungmann, Josef Andreas, Julian Fernandes, and Mary Ellen Evans. “The

Theology of the Eucharistic Sacrifice: The Sacrifice of Christ and of the Church.”

Essay. In The Mass: An Historical, Theological, and Pastoral Survey, 111–27.

Collegeville, Minnesota: The Liturgical Press, 1976.

[6] John Paul II, Pope Saint. “Papal Inauguration Mass of Pope John Paul II.” The Holy See, October 22, 1978. https://www.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/homilies/1978/documents/hf_jp-ii_hom_19781022_inizio-pontificato.html.

[7] Mangan, Charles M, and Gerald E Murray. “Why A Priest Should Wear His

Roman Collar: EWTN.” EWTN Global Catholic Television Network, June

1995. https://www.ewtn.com/catholicism/library/why-a-priest-should-wear-his-roman

collar-11956
[8] Gen. 1:26-38 (NABRE)

The Review Reviews: Carrion Comfort by Gerard Manley Hopkins

Not, I'll not, carrion comfort, Despair, not feast on thee

Not untwist—slack they may be—these last strands of man

In me ór, most weary, cry I can no more. I can;

Can something, hope, wish day come, not choose not to be.

But ah, but O thou terrible, why wouldst thou rude on me

Thy wring-world right foot rock? lay a lionlimb against me? scan

With darksome devouring eyes my bruisèd bones? and fan,

O in turns of tempest, me heaped there; me frantic to avoid thee and flee?

Why? That my chaff might fly; my grain lie, sheer and clear.

Nay in all that toil, that coil, since (seems) I kissed the rod,

Hand rather, my heart lo! lapped strength, stole joy, would laugh, chéer.

Cheer whom though? the hero whose heaven-handling flung me, fóot tród

Me? or me that fought him? O which one? is it each one? That night, that year

Of now done darkness I wretch lay wrestling with (my God!) my God.

At the age of 22, Gerard Manley Hopkins, against the wishes of his parents, converted to Catholicism. He entered the Society of Jesus two years later. As a Jesuit, Hopkins dealt with depression, writing many sonnets about his experiences in what came to be known as his “terrible sonnets.” Included in this selection are “I Wake and Feel the Fell of Dark, Not Day,” “No Worst, There is None,” “Carrion Comfort,” and many others. Hopkins uses this poem, starting as a description of his depression, to explain why God would allow such woes to befall him.

Although Hopkins had already desired a more “Miltonic” style by the time he wrote this sonnet, having written many of his previous poems in this (debatably) iambic pentameter, this sonnet, instead, uses sprung rhythm (which is accentual, rather than foot based verse—using a less regular stress placement). It is possible that this more sporadic accentuation and rhyme, as opposed to the comparative regularity of his previous pentameter sonnets, serve to highlight the seemingly sporadic nature of his punishment. Hopkins fails to understand why God would “lay a lionlimb against” him: it seems random.

As with much of Hopkin’s thought, the source of this punishment, this sorrow, “Despair,” lies in the crucifixion. As Hopkins asks, “why wouldst thou rude on me,” he makes a connection to the rood (cross) that Christ died upon by the homophones “rude” and “rood.” The final four words of the sonnet are also a connection to the crucifixion: “(my God!) my God” echoes Christ’s words on the cross: “my God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” As Christ suffered that we might join the Father in heaven, so too do we suffer that we might make ourselves more worthy of the Father. Only read the words of Hopkins: “That my chaff might fly; my grain lie, sheer and clear.” The chaff, the unnecessary part of his wheat must be blown away by his suffering, leaving only his greater grain behind [1]. By this suffering, “hand rather, my heart lo! lapped strength, stole joy, would laugh, chéer;” he gains strength, he steals joy, he is able to laugh and cheer as a result of this “wring-world right foot rock.”

It is once Hopkins realizes that this suffering was for good that he sees the horror of his fighting against it and of wishing to end his life; to wish for the comfort of being a carrion, as described in the first stanza. He cries: “That night, that year / Of now done darkness I wretch lay wrestling with (my God!) my God.” Hopkins uses the similar sound of “wretch” and “wrestling” to join them together: wrestling against the plan of God has made him a wretch or, being a wretch, he wrestled against his God. It is by this final thought that we see the true comfort for one’s suffering: trust in the eternal, omnibenevolent providence of God.

This sonnet by Hopkins exemplifies the Jesuit inheritance that we share with him: finding God in all things, even in our own suffering. But we must not only find God, but as Hopkins, must praise Him, glorify Him, sing our thanks to Him. The Jesuits were known for going into countries hostile to the faith, risking their lives for the sake of proclaiming the glories of God—this is our inheritance; may we not do the same?

Endnotes: 

[1] This is further explained in his retreat notes from St. Stanislaus’ College, Tullabeg, Jan. 6, 1889.

The Hill We Die On

In an article published last Fall, I proposed a serious re-examination of our relationship with the state of Israel. I cited various actions by Israel which were inconsistent with our American ideals—mostly, humanitarian crimes. In that piece, my aim was to make a general, moral critique of our ‘only genuine ally, Israel’ [1], and present a common grievance among our generation. In this piece, I would like to more directly address fellow conservatives. As our political culture continues to progress, a rift has formed between typically older and younger conservatives: one of foreign policy. Younger conservatives desire that we would place America ‘first’, and leave our insoluble foreign concerns abroad. Yet, support for Israel alone continues to receive such unilateral defense among our party elites.

On June 18th, 2025, Tucker Carlson, former journalist for the Fox News Network, posted an interview with Senator Ted Cruz (R) of Texas. Carlson’s main volley of questions for Senator Cruz were simple, ‘why did the US government attack Iran?’ Senator Cruz spent the interview accusing the Iranian government of various acts of war (‘attempting to assassinate the President’, intervening in domestic politics, and developing nuclear weapons against the West), however, failing to properly ground his accusations.

The conversation later became directly focused on our support for Israel. Senator Cruz noted that when he entered Congress in 2012, his stated intention was to be the “leading defender of Israel in the United States Senate.” An odd thing for a Canadian-born, Cuban-American legislator from Texas to aspire to. Senator Cruz deepened his resolve by claiming that Christians have been biblically commanded to defend Israel (citing Genesis 12:3). Leaving aside the absurdity of claiming that biblical Israel is synonymous with the modern state of Israel, it is even further absurd to rationalize that this then lays an impetus on American foreign policy. The warhawk agenda knows no moral stance too sacred to corrupt. However, I only mention this instance to question why many in the old guard are decidedly intent on support for Israel, especially when their rationale seems so flimsy.

Examples abound, but attention and space is limited, so I will only cite some recent prominent examples:

• On August 4th, 2025, Speaker of the House, Mike Johnson (R), made an unofficial visit to the conflicted settlements of the West Bank [2]. Speaker Johnson became the highest ranking American to visit the settlement and used his position to voice unequivocal support for Israeli occupation; stating, “the mountains of Judea and Samaria are the rightful property of the Jewish people”, and that “even if the world thinks otherwise, we stand with you.” Such statements are hardly tactful attempts at peace and misaligned with the will of the American people. With such statements Speaker Johnson not only hinders peace in the region, but also alienates our allies. This heavy-handed, American diplomacy is expressly damaging to our position as peace-keepers, and even more to our identity as moral leaders.

• The United Kingdom and France had moved to propose recognizing Palestinian statehood if Israel will not commit to a cease-fire, a move which President Trump has stated ‘no position on’[3]. However, when Canada joined their proposition, President Trump leveraged our ongoing tariff negotiations with Canada to say this “will make it very hard for us to make a Trade Deal with them. Oh’ Canada!!!” [4] If the administration’s intent in raising tariffs was to better our trade deficit, generate revenue for our government, and help American industry, why are we economically punishing an ally for speaking out against Israel’s humanitarian crisis? 

Furthermore, I do not only disagree with the administration because Israel is its object. Tariff policy was likewise misappropriated to punish Brazil for indicting their President, Jair Bolsonaro [5]. 

• Early in his second term, President Trump issued executive order 13899, an order meant to take “forceful and unprecedented steps to combat antisemitism” [6]. Part of the order urged agencies to use all means available to curb antisemitism on campuses and in public life; even to the point of revoking visas and denaturalizing citizens. Denaturalization in itself is a nebulous topic but one with legal precedent. However, it is quite difficult to maintain the moral high ground when we are willing to use extensive measures against legal immigrants, founded on contentious definitions, in favor of a foreign state. The federal government, following the 2016 IHRA Bucharest plenary, defines antisemitism as “a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews” [7],which is proper and fitting. Yet, some of the stated examples are difficult to practically adopt. For example, one cannot “deny the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.” But many organizations like Amnesty International [8], The Guardian [9], PBS [10], Georgetown’s Berkeley Center [11], and the Human Rights Watch [12] are quite sure that the state does not maintain a race-neutral perception of Palestinians, even a negative one. Further, one may not “apply double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.” But there is clearly a double standard in how our government treats Israel. No other nation in the world would dare to so overtly subjugate two million refugees and assert that the best course would be to involuntarily remove them [13]. Israel demands justice for themselves, but expects leniency which cannot be expected to any other nation.

It is not so much that our nation supports an ally, nor whether the Israelis have a right to statehood, but that our current administration seems to tie every issue into the support of an ever-dismally-favorable nation. Across the board, politically minded Americans, especially our youth, have gained a worse outlook on our support for Israel [14]. Gone are the days where support for Israel was a tepid part of the ‘American Imperial’ ticket, now we can barely find sanity in their conduct of war, and our elections are suffering for it. I hate to beat a dead horse (because it was mentioned in my previous coverage of Israel), but it is nothing short of astounding that in their only debate, the singular issue Trump and Harris shared ground on was Israel. Both candidates raced to the bottom to show unwavering patriotism to their foreign lobby [15]. 

As stark as these points may seem when taken out of context, I wish that these things did not require coverage. To many readers, these kinds of objections span a deep rift between our domestic standards and foreign policy. We cannot maintain consistency abroad and at home, when this is the conduct that our ally chooses to employ; and we especially, cannot continue to allow our government to unilaterally seek their friendship against American popular opinion.

I wish we could leave these concerns and return to America First. To truly focus ourselves on the problems which actually affect Americans. Leave the Saudis and Israelis with the principle of subsidiarity; let them deal with their regional concerns. If our administration is to “Make America Great Again”, then we cannot continue to engage in Middle Eastern affairs. Before Israel is ever brought back into the national conversation, we must first resolve our issues at home. To what concern is Israel to the American family, when cartels plague our southern border and peddle illegal substances to our inner-cities; when a medical procedure can place a man into dire financial straits; when children are continuing to become exposed to sex and pornography at younger and younger ages; when exorbitant student debt is the entrance fee for a chance to make a livable salary; when millions of the unborn are lost every year; or when political violence continues to shock our nation?

It is not whether Israel has a right to statehood, but of what concern that is to us. Moreso, why is this the issue which our party elites will go to such extreme lengths when we are so troubled at home. So why must our representatives and political establishment, especially of my own party, choose this hill to die on?

Endnotes: 

[1] “US Working to End Use of Term West Bank, Mike Johnson Says | The Jerusalem Post.” 2025. The Jerusalem Post | JPost.com. https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/article-863278. 

[2] Luscombe, Richard. 2025. “Speaker Mike Johnson Visits Occupied West Bank to Support Israeli Settlers.” The Guardian. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/aug/04/mike-johnson-israel-west-bank. 

[3] Bazail-Eimil, Eric, and Esther Webber. 2025. “Trump Administration Keeps Outrage about Palestinian State Limited to Sharp Words.” POLITICO. Politico. https://www.politico.com/news/2025/09/24/trump-administration-punishing-allies-recognizing-palestinian-state-00577873.  

[4] Price, Michelle L. 2025. “Trump Using Canada’s Recognition of Palestinian State in Trade Talks.” AP News. https://apnews.com/article/trump-tariffs-palestinians-canada-d5613417c217374352305564c6a96842. 

[5] The White House. “Addressing Threats to the United States by the Government of Brazil.” 2025. The White House. https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/07/addressing-threats-to-the-us/. 

[6] The White House. 2025. “Fact Sheet: President Donald J. Trump Takes Forceful and Unprecedented Steps to Combat Anti-Semitism – the White House.” The White House. https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheets/2025/01/fact-sheet-president-donald-j-trump-takes-forceful-and-unprecedented-steps-to-combat-anti-semitism/. 

[7] U.S Department of State. 2016. “Defining Antisemitism.” United States Department of State. https://www.state.gov/defining-antisemitism/. 

[8] Amnesty International. 2022. “Israel’s Apartheid against Palestinians: A Cruel System of Domination and a Crime against Humanity.” Amnesty International. https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2022/02/israels-apartheid-against-palestinians-a-cruel-system-of-domination-and-a-crime-against-humanity/. 

[9] Graham-Harrison, Emma, and Quique Kierszenbaum. 2025. “Thousands of Israelis Join Violent, Racist March through Jerusalem’s Muslim Quarter.” The Guardian. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/may/26/thousands-join-israeli-flag-march-through-muslim-quarter-of-old-city-in-jerusalem. 

[10] Zion, Illan Ben. 2023. “Israeli Crowds Chant Racist Slogans, Taunt Palestinians during Jerusalem Day March.” PBS NewsHour. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/israeli-crowds-chant-racist-slogans-taunt-palestinians-during-jerusalem-day-march. 

[11]  Karkabi, Nadeem. 2021. “Jewish Religious Nationalism in Israel and the Racist Exclusion of Palestinians.” Berkleycenter.georgetown.edu. https://berkleycenter.georgetown.edu/responses/jewish-religious-nationalism-in-israel-and-the-racist-exclusion-of-palestinians. 

[12] Human Rights Watch. 2021. “A Threshold Crossed: Israeli Authorities and the Crimes of Apartheid and Persecution.” Human Rights Watch. Human Rights Watch. https://www.hrw.org/report/2021/04/27/threshold-crossed/israeli-authorities-and-crimes-apartheid-and-persecution. 

[13] Said, Summer, Robbie Gramer, and Omar Abdel-Baqui. 2025. “Israel Is Quietly in Talks to Relocate Palestinians from Gaza.” The Wallstreet Journal. https://www.wsj.com/world/middle-east/israel-is-quietly-in-talks-to-relocate-palestinians-from-gaza-90a7ab23?gaa_at=eafs&gaa_n=ASWzDAjMJUkNAZzbZv2p30I4LRiZCWnVzV73cgXJglPrmryiPYMKXRGEybu7bhqDnrs%3D&gaa_ts=68a77887&gaa_sig=3iMOoQsRpPc3zaTas-6YxW66DYYDRA3cTLonOP3ihYDrifx4wOI_ZTQOracOl5YnJPgHjq0JWDci7eJOiZkXng%3D%3D. 

[14] Muchnick, Jordan, and William A Galston. 2025. “Support for Israel Continues to Deteriorate, Especially among Democrats and Young People.” Brookings. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/support-for-israel-continues-to-deteriorate-especially-among-democrats-and-young-people/. 

[15] Jakes, Lara. 2024. “Where Do Trump and Harris Stand on Israel-Gaza Conflict?” Nytimes.com. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/11/world/middleeast/trump-harris-israel-gaza.html.